Aviation: Foreign-Registered Aircraft

Lord Rotherwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will conclude the consultation on foreign-registered aircraft.

Lord Davies of Oldham: We expect to publish the consultation response document in June 2006.

Benefits: Under-25s

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many people under the age of 25 have claimed incapacity benefit and income support on incapacity grounds each year since 2001.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The available information on the number of claimants less than 25 years of age at November each year is in the tables.
	
		Incapacity benefit and severe disablement allowance claimants, aged 16 to 24, Great Britain
		
			  Number 
			 2001 165,860 
			 2002 174,350 
			 2003 176,700 
			 2004 178,230 
			 2005 169,720 
		
	
	
		Income support claimants in receipt of a disability premium, aged 16 to 24, Great Britain
		
			  Number 
			 2001 91,700 
			 2002 75,270 
			 2003 72,000 
			 2004 67,900 
			 2005 62,250 
		
	
	
		Income support claimants also in receipt of incapacity benefit or severe disablement allowance, aged 16 to 24, Great Britain
		
			  All cases Without a disability premium With a disability premium 
			 2001 123,390 41,360 82,040 
			 2002 109,990 41,160 68,830 
			 2003 105,060 39,280 65,780 
			 2004 99,870 37,930 61,940 
			 2005 90,000 33,280 56,720 
		
	
	1 Figures have been rounded to the nearest 10.
	2 IB/SDA "claimant" figures include credits-only cases.
	Source: DWP Work and Pensions Longitudinal Study (WPLS)

Birds: Imports

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What change there has been in the number of confiscations of illegal imports since the temporary ban on imports of exotic wild birds.

Lord Bach: There is no evidence to suggest that there has been any significant change in the number of confiscations of illegally imported exotic wild birds into the UK since the introduction of the ban.

British Coal Compensation

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they became aware that the Union of Democratic Mineworkers (Nottingham section) and its claims handling company, Vendside Ltd, were deducting and retaining additional administration and legal fees from the compensation paid by the Department of Trade and Industry to retired miners, their widows and families under the claims handling agreement, British Coal respiratory disease litigation.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The department became aware in April 2000 that such fees were being deducted.

British Coal Compensation

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they became aware that the Union of Democratic Mineworkers (Nottingham section) and its claims handling company, Vendside Ltd, were deducting and retaining additional administration and legal fees from the compensation paid by the Department of Trade and Industry to retired miners, their widows and families under the claims handling agreement, British Coal vibration white finger litigation.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The department became aware in April 2000 that such fees were being deducted.

British Coal Compensation

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What estimate they have made of the total financial sum deducted by the Union of Democratic Mineworkers (Nottingham section) and its claims handling company, Vendside Ltd, from compensation paid by the Department of Trade and Industry to retired miners, their widows and families under the claims handling agreement, British Coal respiratory disease litigation and British Coal vibration white finger litigation.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: No such estimate can be made. The conditions and payment of these fees is a matter between claimants and their representatives.

British Coal Compensation

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether public funds intended to compensate elderly and infirm miners suffering from respiratory disease and vibration white finger continue to be diverted to claims firms and trade unions with the assistance of solicitors; and, if so, what action they propose to take to address the situation.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: This is a matter for the Law Society, which my honourable friend the Minister for Energy has met to discuss these issues. The Law Society has urged solicitors to refund any fees deducted and has concluded that, unless full information was given to the miner at the start of the case that most firms of solicitors did not make additional charges in these cases, any charges the solicitor makes to the claimant is likely to give rise to a finding of inadequate professional service.

British Coal Compensation

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many claimants were awarded compensation under the British Coal respiratory disease litigation, broken down between payments made in the following bands: (a) £1 to £99; (b) £100 to £199; (c) £200 to £299; (d) £300 to £399; (e) £400 to £499; (f) £500 to £599; (g) £600 to £699; (h) £700 to £799; (i) £800 to £899; (j) £900 to £999; (k) £1,000 to £1,499; (l) £1,500 to £1,999; (m) £2,000 to £2,999; (n) £3,000 to £3,999; (o) £4,000 to £4,999; (p) £5,000 to £6,999; (q) £7,000 to £9,999; (r) £10,000 to £14,999; (s) £15,000 to £19,999; (t) £20,000 to £29,999; (u) £30,000 to £39,999; (v) £40,000 to £49,999; (w) £50,000 to £74,999; (x) £75,000 to £99,999; (y) £100,000 to £149,999; (z) in excess of £150,000.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Settlement payments in the respiratory disease scheme have been made (as at 23 April) in the above bands as set out below.
	
		
			 Payment Banding Number of Claimants 
			 (a) Up to £99.99 3,949 
			 (b) £100-£199.99 4,846 
			 (c) £200-£299.99 5,547 
			 (d) £300-£399.99 6,280 
			 (e) £400-£499.99 6,629 
			 (f) £500-£599.99 6,986 
			 (g) £600-£699.99 6,502 
			 (h) £700-£799.99 6,241 
			 (i) £800-£899.99 5,973 
			 (j) £900-£999.99 5,527 
			 (k) £1,000-£1,499.99 72,559 
			 (1) £1,500-£1,999.99 34,955 
			 (m) £2,000-£2,999.99 28,246 
			 (n) £3,000-£3,999.99 23,369 
			 (o) £4,000-£4,999.99 11,691 
			 (p) £5,000-£6,999.99 13,459 
			 (q) £7,000-£9,999.99 13,114 
			 (r) £10,000-£14,999.99 13,227 
			 (s) £15,000-£19,999.99 6,909 
			 (t) £20,000-£29,999.99 8,295 
			 (u) £30,000-£39,999.99 4,067 
			 (v) £40,000-£49,999.99 2,263 
			 (w) £50,000-£74,999.99 2,209 
			 (x) £75,000-£99,999.99 707 
			 (y) £100,000-£149,999.99 332 
			 (z) > = £150,000 91 
			  293,973

British Coal Compensation

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many claimants were awarded compensation under the British Coal vibration white finger litigation, broken down between payments made in the following bands: (a) £1 to £99; (b) £100 to £199; (c) £200 to £299; (d) £300 to £399; (e) £400 to £499; (f) £500 to £599; (g) £600 to £699; (h) £700 to £799; (i) £800 to £899; (j) £900 to £999; (k) £1,000 to £1,499; (l) £1,500 to £1,999; (m) £2,000 to £2,999; (n) £3,000 to £3,999; (o) £4,000 to £4,999; (p) £5,000 to £6,999; (q) £7,000 to £9,999; (r) £10,000 to £14,999; (s) £15,000 to £19,999; (t) £20,000 to £29,999; (u) £30,000 to £39,999; (v) £40,000 to £49,999; (w) £50,000 to £74,999; (x) £75,000 to £99,999; (y) £100,000 to £149,999; (z) in excess of £150,000.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Settlement payments in the vibration white finger scheme have been made (as at 23 April) in the above bands as set out below.
	
		
			 Payment Banding Number of Claimants 
			 (a) Up to £99.99 13 
			 (b) £100-£199.99 9 
			 (c) £200-£299.99 23 
			 (d) £300-£399.99 87 
			 (e) £400-£499.99 171 
			 (f) £500-£599.99 2,618 
			 (g) £600-£699.99 278 
			 (h) £700-£799.99 58 
			 (i) £800-£899.99 112 
			 (j) £900-£999.99 83 
			 (k) £1,000-£1,499.99 1,314 
			 (1) £1,500-£1,999.99 782 
			 (m) £2,000-£2,999.99 5,572 
			 (n) £3,000-£3,999.99 7,993 
			 (o) £4,000-£4,999.99 6,640 
			 (p) £5,000-£6,999.99 15,515 
			 (q) £7,000-£9,999.99 19,492 
			 (r) £10,000-£14,999.99 16,643 
			 (s) £15,000-£19,999.99 6,509 
			 (t) £20,000-£29,999.99 8,077 
			 (u) £30,000-£39,999.99 1,351 
			 (v) £40,000-£49,999.99 358 
			 (w) £50,000-£74,999.99 21 
			 (x) £75,000-£99,999.99 2 
			 (y) £100,000-£149,999.99 2 
			 (z) > = £150,000 0

British Coal Compensation

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In view of the special report by Zahida Manzoor, Legal Services Ombudsman for England and Wales, The Miners' Cases, published in April 2006, what action they propose to take to address the situation.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The department has noted the contents of the report. The report is a matter for the Law Society and we will be interested to see the society's response. The Government will continue to discuss progress on this issue with the Law Society.

British Coal Compensation

Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many of the miners and widows who were claimants under the British Coal respiratory disease litigation and the British Coal vibration white finger litigation have died prior to the award of compensation.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: In total, 15,434 claimants died before the award of compensation: 12,198 under the respiratory disease scheme and 3,236 under the vibration white finger scheme.

British Transport Police

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have concluded their review of the British Transport Police.

Lord Davies of Oldham: A review of the British Transport Police is currently being undertaken. Once a conclusion is reached, a Statement will be made to both Houses.

Cancer: Bowel

Baroness Finlay of Llandaff: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What funding is being allocated to the rollout of the bowel cancer screening programme for the financial year 2006–07 and for each of the following years until 2009; and
	How many faecal occult blood testing kits for the bowel cancer screening programme have been ordered for the first year of the screening programme from April 2006 to March 2007; and
	How many people were tested for bowel cancer as part of the screening pilot in Rugby between April 2005 and March 2006; and
	How many people will be tested for bowel cancer as part of the screening programme between April 2006 and March 2007; and
	How many lives they estimate have been saved as a result of the bowel cancer screening pilot in Rugby since 2000; and what are the estimated improvements in cancer survival in (a) 2006–07; (b) 2007–08; and (c) 2008–09 as a result of the bowel cancer screening programme.

Lord Warner: The national bowel cancer screening programme will be rolled out nationally over the next three years. Funding for the first year of the screening programme is being transferred to the national cancer screening team in Sheffield, and Wolverhampton will be the first local screening centre.
	We estimate that around £10 million will be spent on the first stages of the national bowel cancer screening programme. Funding decisions have not yet been made for future years but we are committed to ensuring that the necessary funding will be made available to ensure the full implementation of the programme.
	NHS cancer screening programmes are taking all the necessary action to ensure successful rollout of the programme, including the procurement of testing kits. The kit supplier has been notified that the first order is for 100,000 kits.
	24,345 people were tested in Rugby between April 2005 and March 2006.
	We estimate that we could invite about 120,000 to 150,000 men and women for screening in 2006–07 as part of the national bowel cancer screening programme. In addition, the pilot in Rugby plans to invite a further 28,360 people over the next 12 months.
	The number of people actually tested will depend on the numbers who choose to take up the invitation. Based on the pilot, we are anticipating a response rate of around 60 per cent.
	We estimate that the number of lives saved as a result of the bowel cancer screening pilot is between 100 and 150. Our expectation is to reduce deaths in the population invited for screening by 15 per cent.

Cancer: Bowel

Lord Acton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the drugs (a) oxaliplatin; (b) 5 FU; and (c) Aloxi are used widely in the National Health Service for the treatment of bowel cancer.

Lord Warner: Aloxi or palonosetron is an anti-emetic used in the prevention of nausea and vomiting induced by moderately and severely emetogenic chemotherapy. Its use is not specific to patients with bowel cancer and we do not collect data on the condition associated with the prescription of a particular drug.
	Similarly, fluorouracil (5 FU) is prescribed in both hospitals and primary care and is not used only to treat bowel cancer.
	Oxaliplatin is most commonly prescribed for the treatment of bowel cancer. The hospital prescribing data we have show that the National Health Service is estimated to have spent £13.8 million on oxaliplatin in 2005.

Common Agricultural Policy: Single Farm Payment

Lord Rotherwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the total of common agricultural policy money received by United Kingdom farmers in each of the five years from 2000–01 to 2004–05.

Lord Bach: The Rural Payments Agency is an agency of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and administers the common agricultural policy for England. Payments made to farmers in England for each of the five years are given below. The figures for 2000–01 are the combined figures for the Intervention Board and the elements of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food that merged to become RPA in October 2001.
	
		
			 Year Amount (£m) 
			 2000–01 2,624.9 
			 2001–02 2,011.5 
			 2002–03 2,261.2 (restated figure under merger accounting) 
			 2003–04 2,558.9 
			 2004–05 2,858.1 
		
	
	The detail supporting each of the years can be found in RPA's annual report and accounts under House of Commons publication numbers HC 1197 (for both 2000–01 and 2001–02), HC 940, HC 1009 and HC 82 respectively.

Common Agricultural Policy: Single Farm Payment

Lord Rotherwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What money they expect United Kingdom farmers to receive from the European Union for payment of the single farm payment in England in 2005–06.

Lord Bach: The Rural Payments Agency is an agency of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and administers the single payment scheme for England. The payments that farmers are expected to receive for the 2005 claim year are €2,390 million, less deduction of compulsory and voluntary modulation—3 per cent and 2 per cent respectively.

Common Agricultural Policy: Single Farm Payment

Lord Rotherwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the cost of administering the payment of European Union common agricultural policy money to farmers and landowners in each of the five years from 2000–01 to 2004–05.

Lord Bach: The Rural Payments Agency (RPA) is an agency of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and was formed on 16 October 2001. Its main objective is to administer the common agricultural policy for England. The gross running costs associated with the administration of the payments to farmers for each of the five years are given below. The figures for 2000–01 are the combined figures for the Intervention Board and the elements of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food that merged to become RPA in October 2001.
	
		
			 Year Amount (£m) 
			 2000–01 140.0 
			 2001–02 126.5 (restated figure due to reclassification of costs) 
			 2002–03 186.4 (restated figure under merger accounting) 
			 2003–04 198.4 
			 2004–05 249.2 
		
	
	The detail supporting each of the years can be found in RPA's annual report and accounts under House of Commons publication numbers HC 1197 (for both 2000–01 and 2001–02), HC 940, HC 1009 and HC 82 respectively.

Common Agricultural Policy: Single Farm Payment

Lord Rotherwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the expected cost of administering the single farm payment in England in 2005–06.

Lord Bach: The Rural Payments Agency is an agency of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and administers the single payment scheme for England. The estimated gross running costs associated with the administration of the payments to farmers for the year 2005–06 is £236.5 million for all the schemes managed by the Rural Payments Agency. Please note that this figure is yet to be audited by the NAO.

Energy Efficiency

Baroness Perry of Southwark: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 18 April (WA 171), what are their reasons for believing that the difference between mean calculated emissions and mean as-built emissions identified in the 2004 Building Research Establishment study supports the conclusion in the Energy Efficiency Innovation Review that less than 5 per cent of the expected carbon gains from the 2002 revision of building regulations were lost through non-compliance.

Lord Bach: The Energy Efficiency Innovation Review stated that the shortfall in delivery of carbon savings was 5 per cent, but did not relate this figure to the expected gains from the 2002 regulations. The BRE study cited by the EEIR found that the average calculated carbon emissions for the 99 dwellings tested was 19.5kgCO/m 2 /year while the as-built figure was 20.4 kgCO/m 2 /year. The difference thus corresponded to the quoted increase of 5 per cent. This should more correctly have been described as change in absolute carbon emissions rather than shortfall in delivery of carbon savings.

Energy Efficiency

Baroness Perry of Southwark: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 18 April (WA 171), whether they now accept that the statement in the Energy Efficiency Innovation Review that less than 5 per cent of the expected carbon gains from the 2002 revision of building regulations were lost through non-compliance was inaccurate.

Lord Bach: The Energy Efficiency Innovation Review did not relate this 5 per cent figure to the expected carbon gains from the 2002 regulations. However, this figure should more correctly have been described as change in absolute carbon emissions rather than shortfall in delivery of carbon savings.

Fishing: Salmon

Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What active liaison they have with the Governments of the United States and Canada concerning the North Atlantic Salmon Fund efforts to achieve restoration of north Atlantic salmon stocks.

Lord Bach: The United States and Canada are parties to the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organisation (NASCO) convention, as is the EU. Government representatives continue to take an active role as part of the EU delegation to NASCO and, in that context, have participated in discussions with US and Canadian officials in relation to various relevant activities. There is no active liaison with respect to US and Canadian elements of the North Atlantic Salmon Fund, which is a private fundraising organisation principally supporting the interests of angling groups.

Footwear

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Sainsbury of Turville on 30 March (WA 147), on what basis the European Commission imposed a tariff on footwear from China and Vietnam since only three member states voted in favour of the tariff; and why the United Kingdom abstained.

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: The European Commission may impose anti-dumping duties on a provisional basis after consulting the member states in its anti-dumping and anti-subsidy committee and taking account of positions expressed by the member states. However, Council Regulation (EC) No. 384/96 of 22 December 1995 (as amended) on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community permits the Council, acting by a qualified majority, to decide differently from the Commission.
	The Government recognised at the outset that, irrespective of the UK's position, a majority of member states was unlikely to oppose any duties proposed by the Commission. Therefore the UK sought to limit the scope of the duties and was successful in securing the exclusion of special technology athletic footwear and children's footwear, which were of particular concern to UK importers and retailers. The UK abstained in recognition of this.

Government Departments: Telephone Numbers

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 29 March (WA 119–20), how much income was generated, in the last period for which figures are available, from (a) the recorded message portion, and (b) the remainder of each call to an 0845 or 0870 telephone number assigned to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; and
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 29 March (WA 119–20), how much of the income from 0845 and 0870 telephone numbers assigned to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs accrues to the telephone company; and to which organisation or organisations the remaining income accrues.

Lord Bach: The department accrues no income from any of the advice lines it provides. All call charges are assigned and, on differing ratios, split between the service provider of the advice line and the service provider of the caller. The department does not hold information on revenue generated by telecommunications companies through advice lines.

Influenza Pandemic

Lord Jenkin of Roding: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What lessons were learnt by government departments and agencies from the exercise Common Ground recently carried out by the European Union to test their readiness to cope with a pandemic flu outbreak; whether there are any plans for further such exercises; and, if so, what would be the aims of such exercises.

Lord Warner: The exercise served to develop a better understanding of what action would be needed at various phases of a pandemic and a clearer view of the respective roles and responsibilities ascribed to the agencies likely to be involved in the national and international response. The exercise also enabled us to understand better what other countries were doing and how we would work together.
	On the national level, officials identified several areas where further work was needed to clarify or develop preparedness.
	We understand that the European Commission is considering a further European Union-wide exercise in 2006–07 to test out the lessons learnt and actions taken from the exercise Common Ground.

Influenza Pandemic

Lord Jenkin of Roding: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What plans exist for the sharing of information on stocks of antiviral vaccines between nations in Europe in preparation for a flu pandemic.

Lord Warner: We have responded to a request from the European Commission for information on our stock of antivirals. Member states currently share information with the Commission, with the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and between themselves on their policies and stocks of antivirals and vaccines.

Influenza Pandemic

Lord Jenkin of Roding: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What differences emerged from the exercise Common Ground between the plans of different European countries with regard to restrictions on the movement of goods and people in the event of a flu pandemic.

Lord Warner: Exercise Common Ground provided a useful forum for member states to consider the possible use of travel restrictions during a pandemic. As a result of the exercise, member states agreed that it would be beneficial to attend seminars (organised by the European Commission) to provide a better understanding of the legal basis of the provisions regarding travel restrictions. We will also work with other member states on the practical implications and efficacy of travel restrictions. The exercise also highlighted that there should be further discussion regarding the wider impact of border closure.

Iraq: Veterans

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Drayson on 18 April (WA 184) about the publicly stated comments of incapacitated veterans of the Iraq war, why the mobility-restricted veteran Corporal Corrigan was left without the ability to reach his home independently after being flown back to RAF Halton.

Lord Drayson: I regret that administrative shortcomings resulted in Corporal Corrigan having to make his own way home from RAF Halton. Procedures have since been revised to ensure that appropriate transport arrangements are available.

Japanese Knotweed

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What has been the cost of chemical spraying against Japanese knotweed for the years 2000 to 2006.

Lord Bach: The responsibility for controlling Japanese knotweed rests with the landowner, and therefore we are unable to provide the figures for which the noble Baroness has asked. However, Defra has estimated that, under current methods, eradication would cost over £1.56 billion.

NHS: Dentistry

Lord Jopling: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which legislation prevents dental hygienists from de-scaling patients' teeth without a specific referral by a qualified dentist; and whether a referral must be renewed after a certain period of time.

Lord Warner: Paragraph 23 of the Dental Auxiliaries Regulations 1986 prescribes that a dental hygienist shall not be permitted to scale teeth,
	"except under the direction of a registered dentist and after the registered dentist has examined the patient and has indicated to the dental hygienist the course of treatment to be provided, for the patient".
	The Dentists Act 1984 (Amendment Order) 2005 empowers the General Dental Council (GDC) to make rules on the supervision of dental work which will replace these regulations. At its meeting on 7 December 2005, the GDC agreed that the rules should provide wider scope for treatments by dental care professionals such as dental hygienists and dental therapists. The GDC has agreed that a dentist should carry out a full mouth assessment and provide a treatment plan specifying the intervals at which the patient should attend for further examination or treatment. Pending the reassessment, the patient could take the treatment plan to any appropriately registered dental professional who could, within the overall limits of the plan and the limits of his or her competence, treat the patient. The GDC has also indicated that it would welcome proposals to expand the curricula of dental care professionals to enable increased direct access by patients to dental care professionals, where there is robust training to ensure that patient safety is protected.

NHS: Medical Virology

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the advertised plan to develop a comprehensive medical virology service for Coventry and Warwickshire accords with their commitment to outsource at least 15 per cent. of National Health Service activity to the private sector given the location of Micropathology Limited; and whether this is an economic use of resources.

Lord Warner: Individual National Health Service organisations are responsible for determining how best to provide services to meet the health needs of their local population. University Hospitals of Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust has recently advertised the post of a consultant with virology expertise who will work alongside other clinical teams both within the trust's hospitals and within primary care.

Parliamentary Ombudsman

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bassam of Brighton on 29 March (WA 126), on how many occasions since 1997, and in respect of specific recommendations, the Department for Transport has refused or omitted to give effect to the recommendations of the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

Lord Davies of Oldham: Since its formation in 2002, there have been no cases where the Department for Transport has refused or omitted to give effect to the recommendations of the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

Parliamentary Ombudsman

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bassam of Brighton on 29 March (WA 126), on how many occasions since 1997, and in respect of which specific recommendations, HM Revenue and Customs has refused or omitted to give effect to the recommendations of the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

Lord McKenzie of Luton: HM Revenue and Customs does not keep such statistical information.

Parliamentary Ombudsman

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bassam of Brighton on 29 March (WA 126), on how many occasions since 1997, and in respect of which specific recommendations, the Countryside Agency has refused or omitted to give effect to the recommendations of the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

Lord Bach: The Countryside Agency does not collate figures on the number of occasions when it has refused or omitted to give effect to the recommendations of the Parliamentary Ombudsman. While it is likely that a definitive reply could only be provided at disproportionate cost, we believe that there have been no cases at the Countryside Agency since its establishment in 1999.

Parliamentary Ombudsman

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bassam of Brighton on 29 March (WA 126), on how many occasions since 1997, and in respect of which specific recommendations, the Environment Agency has refused or omitted to give effect to the recommendations of the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

Lord Bach: The Environment Agency does not have collated figures on the number of occasions when it has refused or omitted to give effect to the recommendations of the Parliamentary Ombudsman. However, it believes that there have been no such cases since it was established in 1996.

Parliamentary Ombudsman

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bassam of Brighton on 29 March (WA 126), on how many occasions since 1997, and in respect of which specific recommendations, the Health and Safety Executive has refused or omitted to give effect to the recommendations of the Parliamentary Ombudsman.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: A check of available records shows that HSE has not refused or omitted to give effect to any recommendations.

Railways: Network Statements

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	By what date railway infrastructure managers are required to publish their network statements each year; and whether Network Rail, London and Continental Railways and Eurotunnel have met this deadline this year.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The Railways Infrastructure (Access and Management) Regulations 2005 require infrastructure managers to publish their network statements no less than four months before the deadline for requests for infrastructure capacity. The Channel Tunnel (International Arrangements) Order 2005 places the same requirement on Eurotunnel. We expect the deadline to be met by the organisations listed.

Roads: Utility Works

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether their proposal to exempt utilities from overrun charges on footway works under the Traffic Management Act 2004 accorded with their policies to encourage walking.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The regulations that would cover overrun charges on footway works are at draft stage. It is currently proposed that charges for prolonged occupation of the highway will not apply to those works exclusively on the footway of streets that have not been designated as traffic sensitive.
	During works that occupy part or all of the footway, a safe route for pedestrians must be provided that is at least 1 metre wide and where possible 1.5 metres or more wide, so that pedestrian access is not impeded. If this requires pedestrians to use temporarily a part of the carriageway, then this could be subject to charges.

Tallow

Viscount Astor: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why, under the waste incineration directive, tallow cannot be used as a fuel.

Lord Bach: The waste incineration directive does not ban the use of tallow as a fuel. Installations may burn tallow provided that they comply with regulatory requirements. If, as is usually the case, the tallow is waste within the definition given in the EU waste framework directive, the regulatory requirements include one for a permit issued under the Pollution Prevention and Control Regulations 2000 incorporating the requirements of the EU waste incineration directive.